Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Think the first Patriot Act was a civil rights and personal privacy tragedy? Just wait until you see Patriot Act II. Section 102 of the police state bill would make it a crime to engage in any information gathering, meaning that people who gather news headlines on the Internet would suddenly be deemed criminals and terrorists. Essentially, the law would destroy any last illusions of freedom in the United States. It would turn the USA into a communist-style police state, where no person is truly free.

Haven't they left this bill behind? I thought they introduced a new one, or were going to, that was a combo of Patriot 1 and 2 that is the most absurd violation of our rights to date. I just don't remember the name. It had one of those 'clever' acronyms that asshat politicians think up in the ever increasing span of time that they do nothing with....

Quote:Haven't they left this bill behind? I thought they introduced a new one, or were going to, that was a combo of Patriot 1 and 2 that is the most absurd violation of our rights to date. I just don't remember the name. It had one of those 'clever' acronyms that asshat politicians think up in the ever increasing span of time that they do nothing with....

"FISA currently defines "agent of a foreign power" to include a person who knowingly engages in clandestine intelligence gathering activities on behalf of a foreign power--but only if those activities "involve or may involve a violation of" federal criminal law. Requiring the additional showing that the intelligence gathering violates the laws of the United States is both unnecessary and counterproductive, as such activities threaten the national security regardless of whether they are illegal. This provision would expand the definitions contained in 50 U.S.C. ? 1801(b)(2)(A) & (B). Any person who engages in clandestine intelligence gathering activities for a foreign power would qualify as an "agent of a foreign power," regardless of whether those activities are federal crimes."

basically what that part says is that clandestinely gathering intelligence for a foreign power (which would now include international terrorists under section 101) can make you an "agent of a foreign power".

i have no idea, from reading the bill, where the author of that story got the idea that "people who gather news headlines on the Internet would suddenly be deemed criminals and terrorists."

Yes but a foreign power has been redefined to include sleeper cells and individuals not attached to a known terrorist organization. So essentially, if they don't like you and you gather news, they can make you a criminal.

Section 101, "This provision would expand FISA's definition of "foreign power" to include all persons, regardless of whether they are affiliated with an international terrorist group, who engage in international terrorism."

As used in this chapter - (1) the term ''international terrorism'' means activities that - (A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended - (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum; (2) the term ''national of the United States'' has the meaning given such term in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act; (3) the term ''person'' means any individual or entity capable of holding a legal or beneficial interest in property; (4) the term ''act of war'' means any act occurring in the course of - (A) declared war; (B) armed conflict, whether or not war has been declared, between two or more nations; or (C) armed conflict between military forces of any origin; and (5) the term ''domestic terrorism'' means activities that - (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended - (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

The fact that they have already associated drug use with terrorism should give anyone an idea of how schizophrenic their approach to 'terrorism' is, let alone how broad their definition of a 'terrorist' will likely continue to expand as they see fit